USA > Vermont > The history of Vermont, from its discovery to its admission into the Union in 1791. By Hiland Hall > Part 2
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55
1Colonial Hist. N. Y., vol. 3, p. 678, and vol. 1, p. 27, 28. Brodhead's N. York, vol. 1, p. 140, 142.
.
8
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
ferred on them powers of government, while others only conveyed the title to the soil.
These charters were irrevocable by the king, who while they remained in force had no authority to recall the titles or the political privileges with which he had thus parted. The charters might, indeed, be declared forfeited for a violation by the grantces of some of their express or implied conditions, but this forfeiture could not be taken at the pleasure of the crown. It could only be ascertained and declared by a judicial proceeding instituted in the courts of law or equity for that purpose; the usual mode being by what was termed a writ of quo warranto. The grants of the king with cor- porate powers constituted what was denominated charter governments. To this class belonged those of Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island, and also some of the more southern colonies. Where the lands of a province with political authority were granted to an individual the government thus constituted was termed a proprietary government. Of this character were the grants of Maryland to Lord Baltimore, of Pennsylvania to Mr. Penn, and also the grant now under consideration, that of New Netherland to the Duke of York.
There was still another class of English colonial governments which were styled royal governments, of which it is necessary that special notice should be taken. Those were governments in which the king, untramelled by charter grants of the soil or of political privileges retained over them all his original authority. They were presided over by a governor, assisted by a council. appointed by the crown, and removable at his pleasure. The governor had a negative upon the proceedings of any assembly of the people which he might convene, with power to prorogue or dissolve it, whenever he saw fit. To the governor also was committed authority to grant, for and in the name of the king, any unchartered lands in his province. The king retained full power over the boundaries and extent of these royal colonies, and might enlarge >>6 or contract them at pleasure. These changes in the limits and extent of royal provinces were not un- frequently made, sometimes by creating new charter governments in portions of the territory, sometimes by the adjudication of boundary disputes between provinces, at others by descriptions of territory in commissions to governors, and sometimes by mere informal recogni- tion or usage. To this class of royal provinces belonged both New Hampshire and New York at the time of the territorial controversy between them in relation to Vermont ; for although the latter province had originally been chartered to the Duke of York, with
-
9
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
political authority, yet on his aecession to the throne in 16S5 his title merged in the crown, and the colony was ever afterwards governed as a royal province.
Owing perhaps to the imperfect knowledge in England of the geography of this country, and especially of its interior; or to the small value which was placed upon its remote and uncultivated lands, or to the carelessness or dishonesty of draughtsmen or transcribers of patents. or others, many of the descriptions of territory in the early English charters were confused and of uncertain meaning, so much so, that new grants were frequently found to clash with others of previous date, or to be of very indefinite and doubtful extent.
Thus the grant of New Hampshire to Mason in 1629, which reached southerly to the middle of the river Merrimack plainly clashed with that of Massachusetts, which had been made two years previous, and which extended northerly to a line three miles to the northward of every part of that river. The descriptions of their boundaries were also so confused in other respects as to produce a long and tedious controversy which was finally settled by the king in council, by establishing an arbitrary line that neither of the parties claimed. So likewise there was a direct conflict between the two charters of Connecticut and Rhode Island, the former granted in 1662 and the latter, the year after. By the first charter Con- necticut was bounded east by Narragansett river and bay, and by the latter Rhode Island included the whole of that river and bay, and extended west twenty miles farther to Pawkatue river. Notwith- standing the priority of the Connecticut charter, the disputed terri- tory, after a tedious controversy, was retained by Rhode Island by the final decision of the king. Indeed there were scarcely any two of the original English colonies adjoining each other, between which serious controversies did not arise, growing out of the ambiguous or contradictory language of the evidences of their title under the crown.
The charter of King Charles to the Duke of York when brought into comparison with those of adjoining colonies, was found from its indefinite language to be peculiarly exposed to disputes of this cha- racter. Not only did it occasion sharp and tedious controversies with the several New England colonies, of which full accounts will be given hereafter, but also with the two adjoining provinces of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which bounded it to the west and south.
In pursuance of the English claim to the whole northern part of this continent, King James the second, in 1600, granted in one
1 Story's Com., vol. 1, p. 75, 83. IIutchinson, vol. 2, p. 313.
2
10
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
charter to two separate companies, the one denominated the London and the other the Plymouth company, the right to colonize any part of North America between the latitudes of thirty-four and forty- five degrees north. The London company, whose settlement was to be distinguished as the first colony of Virginia. might plant any where between the thirty-fourth and forty-first degrees of north lati- tude, or between cape Fear and the cast end of Long Island. The Plymouth company, whose settlement was to be called the second colony of Virginia, might plant any where between the thirty-eighth- and forty-fifth degrees of north latitude, or in other words between Delaware bay and Halifax; but neither company was to begin its settlement within one hundred miles of any spot previously occupied by the other. Each colony was to extend along the coast fifty miles each way from the spot first occupied, and one hundred miles inland. Under this charter the first permanent English settlement on this continent was made at Jamestown in Virginia. the following year. In 1609, the London company obtained from the crown a new charter, with powers of government, comprising a territory which reached two hundred miles south and the same distance to the north of Old Point Comfort ; that is, from about latitudes thirty-four to forty degrees north, and extended west to the Pacific Ocean. This charter was however vacated in England, in 1624, by writ of quo warranto, and Virginia becoming thereby a royal colony, several new provinces, and among them Maryland and North Carolina, were subsequently carved out of its territory, by charters from the king.
The early operations of the Plymouth company were not of an encouraging character. Attempts were made in 1607. 1610. and 1616, to establish colonies on the coast of " North Virginia," the latter under the famous Capt. John Smith, but all of them proved unsuccessful. The company however, under date of Nov. 3. 1620, obtained from the crown a new charter, incorporating them by the name of " the council established at Plymouth in the county of Devon, for the planting, ruling, ordering, and governing of New England in America," by which there was granted them in full pro- perty with exclusive jurisdiction, settlement and traffic, all that part of America "lying in breadth from 40 to 48 degrees north latitude, and in length by all the breadth aforesaid, throughout the main land from sea to sea." The whole of North America, as claimed by the English, was thus divided into the two provinces of Virginia and New England, by a line very nearly corresponding with that which now separates the late slaveholding from the non-slaveholding states,
11
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
the charter of the Plymouth company comprehending the whole of New York as well as New England.1
This Plymouth company was not however, destined to plant the first English colony within the territory which had thus been granted them. At the date of their charter, Nov. 3, 1620, a small band of men with their families, in a frail bark, were approaching its wild and inhospitable coast, seeking amidst peril and suffering, a place in which they might enjoy in peace and quiet their peculiar religious opinions. Such a place they found a few weeks afterwards, and named it New Plymouth, after the port from which they had last embarked in England. This settlement was made without any au- thority from the king or his patentees, and it was not until nine years afterwards, that they obtained a grant from the council of Plymouth, of a territory including their settlement, and covering most of the south-east part of the present state of Massachusetts. Plymouth constituted a separate and distinct colony from Massachu- setts, until 1691, when it was made a part of that province, by charter from King William and Queen Mary.2
Of the New England colonies. Massachusetts was the next in the order of time. The council of Plymouth by their deed of indenture, duly executed under their common seal, and bearing date March 19, 1627, conveyed to " Sir Henry Roswell, Sir John Young, Thomas Southcott, John Humphreys, John Endicott, and Simon Whitcomb, their heirs and assigns and their associates forever, all that part of New England in America," lying between the Merrimack and Charles rivers and three miles to the south of Charles river, " and lying and being within the space of three English miles to the north- ward of the said river, called the Monomack alias Merrimack, or to the northiward of any and every part thereof, and all lands and hereditaments whatsoever lying within the limits aforesaid north and south in latitude and in lengthand longitude all the breadth aforesaid, throughout the mainland there from the Atlantic and western sea and ocran on the east part to the south sea on the west parts."
King Charles, by letters patent, dated March 28, 1628, confirmed to the said Roswell, Young, Southcott, Humphreys, Endicott and Whitcomb and their associates by name, being eighteen in number, all the lands before conveyed to them by the council of Plymouth by the same descriptive words, and also created the said Roswell, Young, Southcott, Humphreys, Endicott and Whitcomb and their
' ILuz., vol. 1. Brod. N. Y. 138.
" Story on the constitution, Book 1, chap. iii.
12
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
associates, a body politic by the name of " the governor and company of Massachusetts Bay in New England," with extensive powers of government. The southern line of the territory thus conveyed and confirmed, which was run three miles south of the southernmost part of Charles river, is identical with the present north line of Con- necticut extended due cast to the Atlantic and west to the Pacific ocean. The northern boundary was long the subject of controversy. Of the Merrimack river, little could have been known at the time of the grant. It is now understood to be formed in the interior of New Hampshire, by the junction of the Pemigewasset and the Winnipi- scogee rivers, in latitude about forty-three and a half degrees north. After running from thence nearly south about sixty miles it turns rather abruptly towards the east and pursuing that direction for about thirty miles empties into the Atlantic. It was claimed by Massa- chusetts that what is now known as the Winnipiseogee branch constituted a part of the Merrimack, which if correct would carry its source some twenty or thirty miles farther north than the junction of that river with the Pemigewasset.
There would seem to be little, if any, doubt from the language of the charter of Massachusetts that the northern boundary of the territory would be a line drawn from a point three miles north of the mouth of the Merrimack and thence following up the course of that river at three miles distance from " any and every part thereof," until it reached another point three miles north of its source or termination, and from thence due west to the Pacific ocean. Whether this west line should start from the junction of the Pemigewasset with the Winnipiscogee, or at the head waters of the latter river, it will be readily seen, by reference to a map of the Northern States, that between it and the southern boundary line there would be com- prised a large portion of the present states of New Hampshire and Vermont, and more than half of the territory of New York, includ- ing all the western part of it, which lies to the southward of Lake Ontario. Massachusetts further elaimed, though without apparent reason, that the north line also extended east from the three mile point north of the head waters of the Merrimack, thus including much of the residue of New Hampshire, and a great part of Maine.1
In 1635 the council of Plymouth, after distributing among its members a large portion of the residue of its territory, surrendered its charter to the crown. The previous grant of the company, to Sir
1 IIaz., vol. 1, p. 239, 564, 572. Story, book I, chap. iv. Records of Massa- chusetts, vol. 3, p. 288, 321. Hutchinson, vol. 1, p. 1.
+
13
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
Henry Roswell and his associates, of the territory of Massachusetts, and the King's confirmatory charter of it, were left unimpaired and were in full force at the time of the issuing of the charter of King Charles to the Duke of York, in 1664.
Originally, and until 1662, there were two separate colonial organi- zations in Connecticut, one of which was called Connecticut, and the other New Haven. The boundary between them was not very de- finitely fixed, but the former colony was understood to include the towns to the eastward of Connecticut river, and those along the river on both sides of it. It was at first occupied at Winsdor in 1633, by a few settlers from Plymouth, who were followed the next and succeeding years, by larger bodies of emigrants from Massachusetts, who settled at Wethersfield, Saybrook, Hartford and other places.
New Haven was first colonized in 1638, by emigrants who came directly from England, and in the course of ten or twelve years their plantations had extended along the Long Island sound, some sixty miles to the westward of Connecticut river, and to within less than twenty miles of the Hudson. Several English settlements had also been made on the easterly portion of Long Island, under the pro- tection, of either the Connecticut, or the New Haven governments. These settlements of the colonies of Connecticut and New Haven were made in disregard of the before mentioned claims of the Dutch, who, in fact, had occupied a post on Connecticut river, in the vicinity of the present site of Hartford, which they called Fort Good Hope, a few months prior to the English settlement at Windsor, in 1633. The Dutch continued to occupy a few acres of land in the vicinity of this fort until it was surrounded by English settlements, and until about the year 1654, when during the war between Crom- well and the Netherlands, it was declared forfeited to the English at Hartford, who took possession of it. This is believed to have been the only settlement of the Dutch, on the main land to the eastward of Greenwich, with which the English plantation had come in collision. The Dutch had, however, long possessed a por- tion of the west end of Long Island. 1
The Dutch and English were rivals for the Indian trade, and a feeling of jealousy and distrust had always existed between them, producing many controversies of a serious character in regard to their trade and intercourse with the natives and with cach other; and also in relation to boundaries .?
' Brodhead's N. Y. Bancroft, vol. 2, chap. xv.
2 Brodhead's N. Y., 247, 257, 260, 293-4. Hutchinson, vol. 1, p. 148.
14
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
In 1643, a confederacy, known as the united colonies of New England, was entered into between delegates from Plymouth, Connecticut, New Haven and Massachusetts, by which commissioners from each colony were to meet annually and oftener. if necessary, to consider and determine matters relating to the general interest. In order to consider and adjust the various disputes existing between the English and Dutch it had been arranged that Governor Stuyvesant should attend a meeting of the commissioners to be held at Hartford in the month of September 1650. Accordingly the governor accompanied by his secretary and a large suite embarked at Man- hattan and reached the place appointed, by way of the sound and Connecticut river. The negociation being opened, a long correspond- ence ensued in which the points of controversy were reviewed and explained in detail, and it was finally agreed that "all differences " should be referred to two delegates, from each side, who should prepare satisfactory articles of agreement. On their part, the New England commissioners appointed Simon Bradstreet of Massachusetts and Thomas Prence of Plymouth ; and Governor Stuyvesant on his part delegated Captain Thomas Willett and Ensign George Baxter. These representatives of the respective parties after duly considering the matters committed to them, on the 19th of September 1650, made an award or agreement in writing under their hands, which was afterwards known as the Hartford treaty. This treaty, so far as it related to boundaries, was in the following words, viz :
1. That upon Long Island, a line run from the westermost part of the Oyster Bay, south and in a straight and direct line to the sea, shall be the bounds between tlie English and Dutch there; the easterly part to belong to the English, the westermost part to the Dutch.
2. The bounds upon the mainland to begin at the west side of Greenwich Bay, being about four miles from Stamford, and to run a northerly line twenty miles up into the country, and after, as it should be agreed by the two governments of the Dutch and of New Haven ; provided the said line come not within ten miles of Hudson's. river. And it is agreed that the Dutch shall not at any time here- after, build any house or habitation within six miles of the said line. The inhabitants of Greenwich to remain, till further consideration thereof be had, under the government of the Dutch.
3. That the Dutch shall hold and enjoy all the lands in Hartford that they are actually possessed of, known orset out by certain marks or bounds ; and all the remainder of the said land on both sides of Connecticut river to be and remain to the English there. And it is
1.
15
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
agreed that the aforesaid bounds and limits. both upon the island and main, shall be observed and kept inviolate, both by the English of the United Colonies and all the nation. without any encroachment or molestation, until a full and final determination be agreed upon in Europe by the mutual consent of the states of England and Holland."
It will be noticed that by this treaty about two-thirds of Long Island was left to the English. and that the boundary line on the main land commenced very near what is now the south west corner of Connecticut, and running northerly so as not to approach nearer than ten miles to the Hudson river. gave some territory to the English which was afterwards relinquished to New York.
This treaty boundary was formally approved and ratified, under the seal of the States General of the United Netherlands, February 22, 1656. as " The line of division between New Netherland and New England ;" and the English remained in the undisturbed possession of the territory thus agreed upon, until the surrender of New Netherland to the forces of King Charles September 8. 1664. This boundary line was not only respected and admitted by the Dutch as the castern limit of New Netherland until the time of its surrender to the English in 1664, but also nine years afterwards. when they retook it from the English and held it for a few months. In the commission which on that occasion was issued to Anthony Colve as governor of the conquered province, dated August 12, 1673, the eastern boundary on the main land is described as running from Greenwich northerly "conformable to the provisional settlement made in 1650 and afterwards ratified by the States General, February 22, 1656, and January 23. 1664."!
It is scarcely necessary to add that the territory of Vermont was wholly unknown to the Dutch during the time of their jurisdiction over New York ; that they had no settlements castward of the banks of the Hudson river as far northerly as the twenty mile line agreed upon by the Hartford treaty would extend, and that it was only to the country bordering on the southern portion of the Connecticut river that they had ever made any specific claim. The relinquish- ment of this claim under an agreement that their castern boundary line of twenty miles in length, might be indefinitely prolonged northerly so that it did not approach the Hudson river nearer than ten miles, was a full and complete abandonment of all claim to the
' Iluz., vol. 2, p. 172. Hutch., vol. 1, 447. Brodh., 518, 621, 654. Col. Hist. N. Y., vol. 1, p. 611, vol. 2, p. 228-609.
-
16
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
whole of Connecticut river, and of all territory to the eastward of said prolonged line, whatever may have been their original preten- sions. And this treaty agreement by the Dutch must be conclusive to show that New York could have no ground whatever for claiming to extend eastward to Connecticut river by virtue of succeeding to the rights of New Netherland.
Soon after the news of the restoration of Charles the second to the throne reached the colonies, John Winthrop governor of Connecti- cut, was sent to England as agent of that colony, and he succeeded in obtaining from the crown. with liberal powers of government, a charter to "the governor and company of the English colony of Connecticut," covering all the territory between the Massachusetts south line on the north, and the sea on the south, and Narragansett bay on the cast, and the Pacific ocean on the west, by the following descriptive words, viz :
" All that part of our dominions in New England, in America, bounded on the east by Narragansett river, commonly called Narra- gansett bay, where the said river falleth into the sea; and on the north by the line of Massachusetts plantation ; and on the south by the sea ; and in longitude in the line of the Massachusetts colony, running from cast to west, that is to say, from the said Narragansett bay on the east to the South sea on the west part, with the islands thereunto adjoining."
This charter bore date April 22, 1662, two years prior to the grant of New Netherland to the Duke of York, and in terms in- cluded the southern portion of the Dutch colony. Whatever may be thought to have been its legal effect upon the territory in actual possession of the Dutch, there can be no possible doubt that it granted to Connecticut all the lands east of the boundary line previously established by the Hartford treaty, and that the king by this charter deprived himself of all right and title to it, and of all power and authority to regrant it to the Duke of York, or any other party.1
1 Conn. Public Records, vol. 2, p. 10. U. S. Land Laws, vol. 1, p. 80. Brodh., p. 702. Bancroft, vol. 2, p. 52-56.
17
EARLY HISTORY OF VERMONT.
CHAPTER III.
THE CHARTER OF KING CHARLES TO THE DUKE OF YORK. 1662 - 1683.
The Dutch commercial rivals of the English - Hostile feeling towards them of King Charles and his brother the Duke of York - They resolve upon a secret expedition for the conquest of Now Netherland - Grant of it to the Duke - Is not described as New Netherland, but in vague terms as English territory and why - Commissioners appointed by the King to Superintend the expedition and visit the New England colonies- They determine upon a line twenty miles east of the Hudson, as the boundary between the Duke's patent and Connecticut, which is afterwards confirmed by the crown.
TT has been already intimated that the conquest of New Nether- land had been agreed upon in the councils of King Charles, prior to his granting the charter of it to the Duke of York. During the period of the civil war in England the commerce of the Dutch was in a prosperous condition, and in the time of the conunonwealth they had become formidable rivals of the English. This rivalry produced a naval war between the two countries, which terminated unfavorably to the Dutch. Towards the close of this war an expe- dition against New Netherland had been prepared by Cromwell with the concurrence of the New England colonies, but the terri- tory was saved to the Dutch for a few years longer by the conclusion of a general peace in the spring of 1650.1;
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.